Abstract In the rapidly evolving fields of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), the reproducibility crisis underscores the urgent need for clear validation methodologies to maintain scientific integrity and encourage advancement. The crisis is compounded by the prevalent confusion over validation terminology. In response to this challenge, we introduce a framework that clarifies the roles and definitions of key validation efforts: repeatability, dependent and independent reproducibility, and direct and conceptual replicability. This structured framework aims to provide AI/ML researchers with the necessary clarity on these essential concepts, facilitating the appropriate design, conduct, and interpretation of validation studies. By articulating the nuances and specific roles of each type of validation study, we aim to enhance the reliability and trustworthiness of research findings and support the community's efforts to address reproducibility challenges effectively.
Desai et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: